Re: M&D, the people’s memory vs the internet

[Thomas Eckhardt]

"Remembrance" belongs to the people, is what Cherrycoke says on page 349, 
juxtaposing"Remembrance" and "History". Is remembrance the same as memory? 
Isn't there an emphasis on honouring the past with "remembrance" instead of 
merely acknowledging and/or recollecting it?
At least since Wordsworth and Coleridge, memory in literature has been 
linked to the imagination. A historical novel may be seen as being created 
from memory, historical facts as in "Play-things for lawyers", and 
imagination. This is obviously the case with M&D, which is also a 
cock-and-bull story in the Sternian tradition. The same goes for 
Cherrycoke's wildly improbable, fantastic tale which takes up most of M&D.
One might also think about the link between uncharted geographical territory 
(M&D) or cyberspace (BE) about to be conquered and subsumed, and the 
imagination. The American West and cyberspace before Facebook,
Google, Amazon etc. (although the Internet was developed as part of CoG 
measures, as Ernie notes, so perhaps there has always been a snake in the 
grass) promise freedom and are also blank spaces that invite projection -- 
very much like the white hump of Moby-Dick does.


Am 18.04.2018 um 19:47 schrieb Smoke Teff:
> Memory, Cherrycoke tells us, belongs to the people.
> 
> Anyone have any thoughts on how the internet, the right to be forgotten, and/or Bleeding Edge play into this?
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>